Decision of principle

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Judgments and resolutions of the upper or supreme courts that clarify legal questions of fundamental interest for the first time or make a significant fundamental change in the interpretation of applicable law are referred to as decisions of principle .

Importance of policy decisions

In legal systems that are structured according to case law , decisions of principle have the effect of a precedent and bind other courts in their future decision-making. Because of their outstanding position, fundamental decisions are very important. Lower-level courts must apply the decision in similar cases in accordance with the stare decisis principle as the higher-level court specifies.

In legal systems based on codified law , fundamental decisions beyond the individual case have no direct binding effect. The reason for this lies in the view that the legislature alone is entitled to legislate and that judges should not be restricted in their independence . In practice, however, fundamental decisions by other courts are often taken into account when interpreting laws so as not to violate the requirement of legal certainty .

Fundamental decisions in Germany

In the German legal system, decisions of principle are usually made by the highest courts and the Federal Constitutional Court . Due to the special legal position of the Federal Constitutional Court, some judgments have immediate legal force and are therefore binding inter omnes .

Examples of fundamental decisions:

  • Herrenreiter case : The Federal Court of Justice ruled in 1958 that,contrary to the wording of the law, there is a right to monetary compensationin the event of significant violations of general personal rights.
  • Complaint shrinking : The Federal Court of Justice ruled in 2007 that the minutes of the main hearing in criminal proceedings can be corrected after the appeal has been lodged, even if this removes the basis for a complaint (so-called "complaint shrinking"). This repealed a hundred-year-old jurisprudence that held a protocol correction in such cases inadmissible.

See also